Non-linear stress-softening of the bacterial cell wall confers cell shape homeostasis.

The bacillus - or rod - is a pervasive cellular morphology among bacteria. Rod-shaped cells elongate without widening by reinforcing their cell wall anisotropically to prevent turgor pressure from inflating cell width. Here, we demonstrate that a constrictive force is also essential for avoiding pressure-driven widening in Gram-positive bacteria. Specifically, super-resolution measurements of the nonlinear mechanical properties of the cell wall revealed that across a range of turgor pressure cell elongation directly causes width constriction, similar to a "finger trap" toy. As predicted by theory, this property depends on cell-wall anisotropy and is precisely correlated with the cell's ability to maintain a rod shape. Furthermore, the acute non-linearities in the dependence between cell length and width deformation result in a negative-feedback mechanism that confers cell-width homeostasis. That is, the Gram-positive cell wall is a "smart material" whose exotic mechanical properties are exquisitely adapted to execute cellular morphogenesis.

Modeling the impact of single-cell stochasticity and size control on the population growth rate in asymmetrically dividing cells.

Microbial populations show striking diversity in cell growth morphology and lifecycle; however, our understanding of how these factors influence the growth rate of cell populations remains limited. We use theory and simulations to predict the impact of asymmetric cell division, cell size regulation and single-cell stochasticity on the population growth rate. Our model predicts that coarse-grained noise in the single-cell growth rate λ decreases the population growth rate, as previously seen for symmetrically dividing cells. However, for a given noise in λ we find that dividing asymmetrically can enhance the population growth rate for cells with strong size control (between a "sizer" and an "adder"). To reconcile this finding with the abundance of symmetrically dividing organisms in nature, we propose that additional constraints on cell growth and division must be present which are not included in our model, and we explore the effects of selected extensions thereof. Further, we find that within our model, epigenetically inherited generation times may arise due to size control in asymmetrically dividing cells, providing a possible explanation for recent experimental observations in budding yeast. Taken together, our findings provide insight into the complex effects generated by non-canonical growth morphologies.

Cell-size regulation in budding yeast does not depend on linear accumulation of Whi5.

Cells must couple cell-cycle progress to their growth rate to restrict the spread of cell sizes present throughout a population. Linear, rather than exponential, accumulation of Whi5, was proposed to provide this coordination by causing a higher Whi5 concentration in cells born at a smaller size. We tested this model using the inducible GAL1 promoter to make the Whi5 concentration independent of cell size. At an expression level that equalizes the mean cell size with that of wild-type cells, the size distributions of cells with galactose-induced Whi5 expression and wild-type cells are indistinguishable. Fluorescence microscopy confirms that the endogenous and GAL1 promoters produce different relationships between Whi5 concentration and cell volume without diminishing size control in the G1 phase. We also expressed Cln3 from the GAL1 promoter, finding that the spread in cell sizes for an asynchronous population is unaffected by this perturbation. Our findings indicate that size control in budding yeast does not fundamentally originate from the linear accumulation of Whi5, contradicting a previous claim and demonstrating the need for further models of cell-cycle regulation to explain how cell size controls passage through Start.

Details Matter: Noise and Model Structure Set the Relationship between Cell Size and Cell Cycle Timing.

Organisms across all domains of life regulate the size of their cells. However, the means by which this is done is poorly understood. We study two abstracted "molecular" models for size regulation: inhibitor dilution and initiator accumulation. We apply the models to two settings: bacteria like Escherichia coli, that grow fully before they set a division plane and divide into two equally sized cells, and cells that form a bud early in the cell division cycle, confine new growth to that bud, and divide at the connection between that bud and the mother cell, like the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. In budding cells, delaying cell division until buds reach the same size as their mother leads to very weak size control, with average cell size and standard deviation of cell size increasing over time and saturating up to 100-fold higher than those values for cells that divide when the bud is still substantially smaller than its mother. In budding yeast, both inhibitor dilution or initiator accumulation models are consistent with the observation that the daughters of diploid cells add a constant volume before they divide. This "adder" behavior has also been observed in bacteria. We find that in bacteria an inhibitor dilution model produces adder correlations that are not robust to noise in the timing of DNA replication initiation or in the timing from initiation of DNA replication to cell division (the C+D period). In contrast, in bacteria an initiator accumulation model yields robust adder correlations in the regime where noise in the timing of DNA replication initiation is much greater than noise in the C + D period, as reported previously (Ho and Amir, 2015). In bacteria, division into two equally sized cells does not broaden the size distribution.

The surprising economics of a "people business".

When people are your most important asset, some standard performance measures and management practices become misleading or irrelevant. This is a danger for any business whose people costs are greater than its capital costs-that is, businesses in most industries. But it is particularly true for what the authors call "people businesses": operations with high employee costs, low capital investment, and limited spending on activities, such as R&D, that are aimed at generating future revenue. If you run a people business-or a company that includes one or more of them how do you measure its true performance? Avoid the trap of relying on capital-oriented metrics, such as return on assets and return on equity. They won't help much, as they'll tend to mask weak performance or indicate volatility where it doesn't exist. Replace them with financially rigorous people-oriented metrics-for example, a reformulation of a conventional calculation of economic profit, such as EVA, so that you gauge people, rather than capital, productivity. Once you have assessed the business's true performance, you need to enhance it operationally (be aware that relatively small changes in productivity can have a major impact on shareholder returns); reward it appropriately (push performance-related variable compensation schemes down into the organization); and price it advantageously (because economies of scale and experience tend to be less significant in people businesses, price products or services in ways that capture a share of the additional value created for customers).